Printable View
I guess there will always be the division.
The same could be said about Aron Ralston, although he didn't die. While most who read his story hail him as a "brave hero", there are the few who call him an idiot for going alone.
Since he's still alive, I'll call him an idiot. :haha:
X10Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombeech
A "personal disaster", for the families, perhaps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Beck
Perhaps this is a disastrous thread, where feelings are hurt and the hurt expressed, disastrously.
Here's the distinction I make: When the people who die were not responsible for the deaths (and more than a few people), then that is a disaster. 9/11, The Iraq War, Katrina, The Titanic - lots of people kilt, and the people kilt, not their fault.
In both the above cases (hiking up the Narrows to take pictures of the flash flood; unprepared idiots heading down Kolob with boyscouts in tow, in unfavorable conditions, and getting THEMSELVES killed), those conditions are not met. Personal disasters for their families? No doubt. But HARDLY a big enough event to be labeled a "disaster" in the general sense of the word.
Certainly, having your wedding reception inconvenienced by being rained on is a disaster for your vision of the perfect wedding, but hardly worth reporting AS A DISASTER in the Salt Lake Tribune.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiktionary
(Have I dug myself a deep enough hole, yet?)
Tom :moses:
The point is, if YOU do really stupid things, at some point you will die.Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscGo
(And then I'll make fun of you on Bogley? No, that's just a side benefit).
These guys did really stupid things, and they died. Y'alls wanna sweep it under the rug?, ignore it? fine. Call the guy a saint because he had a family and did good things in the community? I'm not disagreeing that the guys might have been wonderful people. But it did not protect them from basic physics. In Canyoneering, if you do stupid things, you will die. Might get away with it one, two, ten, a hundred times, but you're rolling the dice. And eventually, you'll get snake eyes.
Tom
No Tom, we just don't think its appropriate to make personal attacks on the dead. Apparently you have no problem with that.Quote:
Y'alls wanna sweep it under the rug?, ignore it?
And, if he had gotten several other people killed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombeech
Killing yourself doesn't make you a dipshit, it's taking someone with you that does.
Tom
Correct, I don't. Because they're DEAD, and it's been more than 10 years, so in the unlikely case that members of the family are reading this, they should either A. have stopped reading quite some time ago; or B. have gotten over it to the point that this does not bother them.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMan
And YES, these are statements of morality, and yes, your morality may be different.
If the soloist on the Chukwalla wall falls off, OK, that's sad, and he was an idiot for soloing above his competence. It is a tragedy for his family. If he falls off and lands on someone else and kills them too - then he's a dipshit.
Tom :moses: (Moral clarity, but at what cost...)
to say the least.Quote:
your morality may be different.
I too believe that I understand what Tom is trying to say, although bluntly, cold and perhaps over the top rhetorically. But sometimes facts are that way. I get angry when people put others in danger. As an example, when on the road nothing makes me more angry than when I am driving and someone does something accidently yet stupid that puts me and my family in danger of losing our lives. I saw a girl texting, eating and applying makeup all at the same time a few months ago. A tragedy if she dies. But I would be very angry if she also took some innocent person out in the process. Her actions would have been stupid, idiotic and irresponsible. She may be a fine person but that doesn't change facts. I deal with pain and hurt every day with my clients who have been hurt by nice people who make dumb mistakes. I have represented the families of victims of a wrongful (negligently caused) death. It is hard. It is ugly. And it hurts.
Back to the subject at hand, I appreciate the blunt reminders. It makes me think twice and hopefully makes me a better canyon leader of young men. These reminders make me reevaluate my plans, take a second look at my preparations, reevaluate the risks in the canyons, etc. I personally think the Kolob thing could be called a disaster, a disaster in judgment, leadership and training. I feel for the families, I feel for the scouts, I ache for their memories, particularly for the young man who watched his dad die. Words cannot describe how I might feel or how badly I feel for this boy, now man. It is truly horrible what happened in Kolob but it doesn't change the disastrous facts. The Kolob disaster seems to be much more than the generic "human error". Am I name calling? No, but these leaders made stupid choices and got people killed. Those are facts and they may hurt to hear or say but facts are facts. OK flame away. My helmet is on. I am sure I will regret entering this spitting match.
Ahh good man! I think perhaps you just hit the "nail on the head" with this issue. So if the "stupid actions" result in death its disrespectful to analyze said persons actions and make a judgement, but if the person survives it's then perfectly ok?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombeech
I'm going to have to analyze this new bit of information. Doesn't make sense (to me) but I'm getting the feeling that's the heart of the matter.
Scott, I believe that you have, very eloquently, hit a majority of the talking points that are important. I applaud TomQuote:
Originally Posted by Scott Card
The guy obviously made bad decisions putting others at risk.
I wonder if there was shock/hypothermia affecting his thought process. Who would go into a raging pothole to retrieve a backpack after they had just watched a friend die from that same scenario? Not to make excuses but it seems like you would have an altered state of mind after watching someone die and then having to continue in the canyon. Sad and tragic for sure. I hope I am never in that situation.
The big decision was, when you hike down to the canyon and you see the stream raging, do you rappel in? Like Ice, I had imagined a rappel sequence down the wall and then finding that the water was too big. Nada. You stand in the stream before the commitment point. Your first rap is next to a big, loud waterfall. That's where you make the decision. Dry, warm, fully functioning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaxx
Which is why the awfulness of this situation. Yes, they had hiked down to it twice before and NOT done it. The leader had been through the canyon before. So, he should have known. Everyone there would have known that going in was a very bad idea. But they went anyway.
T :moses:
*correction 8/26/2016 - they did not hike down to it twice before, they postponed the trip because water was too high in The Narrows for them to get the Narrows permit for their hike out. The only person who had been through the canyon before was Fleischer, and exactly once. So he was the ONLY person in a position to know what was ahead.
I don't disagree that they should have never been in there.
I was pointing out that possibly he was in a state of shock when the decision to go into the water to get his backpack out after all that lead up to that point. Mabey the hypothermia/shock wasn't an issue and he was just a horrible decision maker all around?
This is Bogley, the one place I get to let the rapier wit rape... uh, go off and make a fool of me...Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Card
I am provocateur...
T :moses:
This isn't the same level as "forgetting" to wear a seatbelt though, would you agree? This is the equivalent of your son standing on the roof of the car and falling off going 50 miles per hour. Intentionally putting oneself in a hazardous situation and knowing the danger involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by nat
Your point about offending the families of the victim is well put though. I just can't fathom the "majority" of people on this forum have made similar mistakes. I've done some stuff that others would consider extremely stupid. My first post in this forum 2 years ago was of me doing some "stunt rappelling" and I was bitched out left an right about it. So I would consider myself a risk taker for sure compared to a lot of people here. But I never would look into a whirlpool and think I could swim it. If he had jumped in and the current was "deceptively strong" and overpowered him? Ok he gets a pass. I've swam in the ocean and rip currents are amazing and very sneaky. But he tossed his pack in and it sucked so hard he couldn't pull it out! I suspect even others in the group probably helped him try to pull it out. There is no way he jumped in that pool to retrieve the pack and didn't know how strong the current was.
Again amazing insight for someone who wasnQuote:
Originally Posted by Deathcricket
[quote=James_B_Wads2000]
Again amazing insight for someone who wasn
Sidebar: does anyone else here refer to their Leatherman as their "Ralston Tool"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombeech
:roflol: :roflol: :roflol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Deathcricket